It is conceivable yes, but it would depend on the goodies, and the price.

I'd pay ￡60 max looking at a 10 20 pound increase would be fine for it if Beth were open with the idea from the start and publicly showed they are aiming to increase quality not just margin but any more than that would be over board but it appears some places already pay alot not sure if 50 pounds is more or less than Aus￡110?

The point of dlc being the extra cost us valid but I'd be looking for general content n mechanics added to the build not some thing done often in dlc, things that have to be part of the game from build or things that just don't make a standalone dlc are more preferable IMO. I would much prefer a world with just more diversity than say the extra quests added in dlc.

If they used twice as many voice actors for more dialogue and options with every NPC, incorporated more 3rd party tech like Euphoria, DMM, etc., and made the game world bigger, then yes, I would, a lot too.

The poll needs to be way more complex than this, I think you should have about six options including levels of complexity and the quality of the features and how much money it costs. Anywho, Skyrim is going to cost sixty bucks just like every other new game that comes out, I'm willing to pay about 5 more dollars for sme new/ improved features. But I have faith in Bethesda that Skyrim will be just as badass as any other TES game. :tes:

A more expensive game means that more money was spent making it.

Well if they release a collectors edition or something like that I'm going to be spending more anyways.

If they sold the games for $20 each, they'd still get rich. So no. Video games are already too expensive. Making them more so is just dumb. Honestly, I think they'd make more money by selling them cheaper, more people would buy it. I might buy the Collector's Edition and DLC, but I won't/can't fork over even more money for the base game.

Edit: Not saying they could make more selling for $20 each, but $40 or $50 would probably earn more.

Video games shouldn't even cost $60, much less $100. No way would I pay that. I've got bills and [censored].

No chance in hell Id pay more then $60 for a PC game. It is insane that they are even trying to push this crap. I would love as much content as possible, but there is a limit Id be willing to pay, and $60 is borderline obscene.

This has nothing to do with Skyrim itself so much as games in general. Realistically I don't feel ANY game should be more then $40, but I settle with $50 as a compromise. I mean, back in the early 2000s, developers did just fine selling games at $30-$40 a pop for PC alone, including top of the line tech and even some with fully voiced dialog. So now with a vastly expanded market, why are we still seeing price increases? Is volume sales alone REALLY not cutting it?

In all though, I will pay the inevitable $60 for Skyrim. But since the rest of the PC gaming world seems to be following suit, I will be a LOT pickier about what I do buy. Any higher then $60 and I will probably in all honestly just outright stop buying games altogether. The DS is looking better and better with each passing day.

Nope.

No. Even if it seemed the BEST GAME EVAR!!, I would only pay 45EUR max for a video game.

Not neccesarily

No. There are other games that have all the bells and whistles (of comparable complexity to TES) and don't ask for more money than p.o.s. games like Rogue Warrior.

Would I wait another year or two for them to put in all the nice stuff and actually squash all the bugs? Yes.

For a huge mega-hit game like Skyrim, yes I would because I trust Beth would give us more than our money's worth for it.

For the run of the mill crap games that get pushed out every month, not a chance. Most games are barely worth the money they charge for them as is.

So, I voted yes, but it is a very big conditional yes.

The cost of production for these games has gone through the roof in the past years. If you look at it exponentially we're pretty much paying much less then we should be. With the new engines, 3D, and all this new technology; that 10 years ago was incomprehensible, we're not paying all that much when it comes down to it.

Say you were to run a small independent business, lets say a bakery. Now the cost of wheat and such has gone through the roof due to economic crisis/food shortages. Well you're going to have to charge more in order to pay your bakery rent, supplies, the people that work for you, equipment and so on and so forth. Now say your customers don't want to pay $3 for a loaf of bread instead of $2, well guess what, chances are you're going to go out of business.

Trust me on this there is a price ceiling and floor for every market, big gaming companies such as Bethesda meet with other companies to decide a market price for their product, they look at consumer spending habits and target the amount that we're generally going to spend on their product. They also take into account the cost of producing said product and that's how they get their price. If they don't charge extra then they won't be able to pay the hundreds of employees, development costs, advertising costs and the tons of other expenses that we have no idea about. If they add more content to the game guess what, the price just went up.

But then again you see dip[censored]s like infinity ward and trey arch using the same game with different layouts and the prices just seem to go up year after year. Business is a load of [censored], thats why im into it.

I have to say no. That's a very dangerous concept to introduce to gaming.

"We had X number of people working on this game, from X Voice Staff, to X Animators, to X designers. Therefore, allow us a moment to work the math out for the final price you, the consumer, owe us..."

Dangerous, indeed.

If its in the initial release then yes, I'm not buying any DLC short of expansions

I definitely wouldn't pay more, I already think the games are too expensive. But I don't mind Tes being one of the priciest games (the standard pc edition) as long as the return on investment is clearly superior.

No. How can we define what "more goodies" mean? How do we know the goodies are added "by request" and were not in the original project anyway? TES is already richer in features than most of the games out there, and it's the devs job to do the best product they can in the given budget. There is no room for bargaining.

We don't even know the full list of features it will have.

I'd pay $200 for Skyrim with a Just Cause 2 sized world (plus content to fill it up), good stability, better mod management (less CTDs), and better use of RAM and multi-cores.

Pretty ridiculous and pointless poll. 1. you havent said what exactly you would be paying for 2. You havent said how much and 3. we don't even know what all is already in the game.

I always pay as much as the developer asks. It's their product and it's their right to evaluate the best price/content ratio. If they put the price at 50 euros, it means they think it's worth 50 euros so they could cover the cost and make profit. If they think it should cost 60, I pay 60. There is not a fixed price where I'd say wait a min, I can't pay that much. If it was 100E I can't say I wouldn't buy it. It's not that I blindlessly encourage the devs to raise the prices, I just want to point out that this would you pay more is a very relative thing. More than what? And for what particular feature? I for one would pay 300 euros (relax, guys, it's just abstracting :tongue: ) for a Skyrim that features no loading screens, dynamic seasons, destructible environment, ladders and ropes for thieves, a 50 hour main quest that has multiple choices along the way, mounted combat and at least 100 different voice actors. That would be my ideal Skyrim and I'd pay a lot of money for it, but everyone of us has another "ideal Skyrim" so Bethesda will never cater to every one of us, so... this question is pointless. There is no way we can assess what is suplimentary content and what every feature is worth in money unless it's DLC.

Nope. Since most of what I see being requested revolves around turning the game into a simulation (what with all the reality this and immersion that) and I'm not interested in any of it.

I cant say I care too much about voice acting and fancy graphics. While there are feature I would like, it's gameplay features that do it for me, not fancy "cinematic" stuff that's likely to be added.

So my sad lack of faith makes me say "nay".